By Rudy
Barnes, Jr.
Paul
Harvey, the Chicago news broadcaster known for his “…and now for the rest of
the story” commentary, often admonished his audience that freedom in a democracy
required responsibility or it would be lost.
He echoed Plato and Edmund Burke who had both warned that the
imperfections of human nature, or human depravity, would doom democracy. Plato said that “dictatorship is the natural
result of extreme liberty,” and Burke told 18th century Americans
that in a democracy they would “forge their own shackles.” Pogo the Possum simply said: “We have met the
enemy and it is us.”
We
are just beginning to see the truth of those prophesies. Democracy was on the increase following the
fall of Soviet Communism in 1990, but began a noticeable decline in 2005. Since then authoritarian regimes have proliferated,
and mature democracies in Europe and America have experienced extremist
demagogues who have tapped into public frustration and anger caused by an
immigration crisis, political ineptitude and the erosion of the middle class by
the unrestrained greed and exploitation of big business.
Extremism
is replacing moderation in the world’s democracies, and religion is
contributing to the problem. Increased immigration
has created culture clashes based on religious differences, and the stabilizing
effect of traditional Christian religious institutions has been eroded by the exit
of Nones (those with no religious
preference) and by fundamentalist evangelical sects. In America, evangelical Christians have
supported Donald Trump and Senator Ted Cruz, two extremist GOP candidates for
President, and similar trends are evident in Europe.
Changing
cultural values and the expectations of believers have challenged traditional religious
values as well as those of politics. Advances
in knowledge, reason and the secular concepts of libertarian democracy of the Enlightenment
have transformed both politics and religion in the West, but they have had little
effect in the Islamic cultures of the East, where authoritarian regimes continue
to use religious laws to stifle political freedom. And libertarian democracy in the West is now
threatened by political and religious extremism.
Human
depravity has been a flaw in the concept of libertarian democracy since St. Augustine
proclaimed it to be the consequence of original sin, with God’s grace its only antidote. Rather than rely on God’s grace, ancient
Judaism and Islam relied on religious laws to control human depravity. In libertarian democracies civil rights protect
minorities from a tyranny of the majority, but nothing can prevent people from sacrificing
their liberty to political demagogues. There
have been many examples of populist demagogues in America who have exploited
human depravity to gain power—Donald Trump and Ted Cruz are just the latest examples.
The
rights of democracy and freedom come with the responsibility to exercise those
rights with respect for the rights of others.
Moral restraint is necessary to preserve individual liberty, and when liberty
becomes license, laws are needed to protect people from the depravity of others
and freedom is forfeited. That is how
democracy can evolve into dictatorship.
Libertarian
democracy is not perfect, but it is the only true indicator of the moral
legitimacy of any religion. Morality
cannot be coerced by law, and where religious laws preclude the fundamental
freedoms of religion and speech, as with apostasy and blasphemy laws in Islamic
nations, libertarian democracy cannot exist.
For
religions to be compatible with libertarian democracy, religious standards of
legitimacy, or behavior, should be limited to voluntary moral standards and not
be enforced as coercive laws. Religious
and political diversity require that religions embrace the principles of love over law and the greatest commandment to love God and our neighbors as ourselves—and
that includes unbelieving neighbors and those with opposing political views.
God’s
will is to reconcile and redeem humanity, while Satan’s will is to divide and
conquer. Politicians often use divisive
issues to motivate their constituencies.
In a democracy religion cannot be separated from politics. Political choices involve the welfare of
others and are acts of faith, and the
greatest commandment requires that we support politicians who seek to reconcile
the differences that divide us by balancing individual rights with providing
for the common good, and that we oppose those who exploit our differences for
political gain.
Notes
and References to Resources:
Previous blogs on related topics
are: Religion and Reason, December 8,
2015; Faith and Freedom, December 15,
2014; The Greatest Commandment,
January 11, 2015; Love Over Law: A
Principle at the Heart of Legitimacy, January 18, 2015; Is Religion Good or Evil?, February 15,
2015; Religion and Human Rights,
February 22, 2015; Religion, Human Rights
and National Security, The Kingdom of
God, Politics and the Church, March 15, 2015; May 10, 2015; Faith as a Source of Morality and Law: The
Heart of Legitimacy, April 12, 2015; Religion,
Human Rights and National Security, May 10, 2015; De Oppresso Liber: Where Religion and Politics Intersect, May 24,
2015; Liberation from Economic Oppression,
May 31, 2015; Fear and Fundamentalism,
July 26, 2015; Freedom and Fundamentalism,
August 2, 2015; Balancing Individual
Rights with Collective Responsibilities, August 9, 2015; How Religious Fundamentalism and Secularism
Shape Politics and Human Rights, August 16, 2015; The Power of Freedom over Fear, September 12, 2015; Politics and Religious Polarization,
September 20, 2015; Who Is My Neighbor?, January 23, 2016; The Politics of Loving Our Neighbors as Ourselves, January 30,
2016; The Evolution of Faith, Religion
and Spirituality, February 20, 2016; The
American Religion and Politics in 2016, March 5, 2016; and Religion, Race and the Deterioration of
Democracy in America, March 12, 2016.
On the decline of democracy and
increase in authoritarianism over the last 10 years, see https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/democracy-in-retreat/2016/03/13/dd2e5eba-e798-11e5-a6f3-21ccdbc5f74e_story.html?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_opinions.
For a statistical analysis of the
support of evangelical Christians for Donald Trump by the Pew Research Center,
see http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/03/14/exit-polls-and-the-evangelical-vote-a-closer-look/.
Great summary of the miasma suffocating and poisoning our socio-political and religulious discourse in this country. However, I believe you also need to critique the likely Democratic nominee for the Oval Office since Hillary is every bit as sinister as you portray Trump and Cruz. Yet, to her credit and evidence of her craft, she does a much better job of disguising her depravity with a modern ensemble of smoke, mirrors and sly sound bites. Really, just ask that Vermont Socialist struggling to get more delegates than her for the nomination.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to divisiveness and polarization, Democrats have traditionally focused on the black vote and unions as their primary constituencies, and Sanders will lose to Hillary because she has the black vote locked up and Sanders has limited himself to young people and socialists. Trump and Cruz are staking out evangelical Christians and angry voters as their primary constituencies, and it appears that there are plenty of them out there--but hopefully not enough to outweigh those who want to maintain an orderly and civil democracy.
Delete